When Identities, Interests, and Information Collide: How Subgroups Create Hidden Profiles in Teams

Abstract

Purpose—We review how team members' identities and interests affect team functioning, paying special attention to subgroup dynamics triggered by fault lines and coalitions. This review sets the stage for describing novel pathways through which identities and interests, when considered together, can affect team processes and outcomes.

Design/approach—We use an extended example of a hypothetical team's decision-making process to illustrate how team members' identities and interests intertwine to affect the distribution and flow of information, subgroup dynamics, and team decisions.>

Findings—We develop three specific ideas to demonstrate the utility of this integrative approach. First, we show how the formation of identity-based subgroups can shape information sharing to create a hidden profile where there was none initially. Second, we describe how individual defection can weaken subgroup competition and, paradoxically, increase the chance that a team will optimize its collective welfare. Third, we analyze how shared identities can shape team members' side conversations in ways that create shared interests and information among those with similar identities, even before the team begins its formal meetings.

Originality/value—By identifying new routes through which identities and interests can affect team functioning, we provide a foundation for scholars in this domain to theoretically develop and empirically test these and related ideas. More generally, we encourage scholars to study the interplay among identities, interests, and information in their own research to paint a more complete picture of how individuals, subgroups, and teams perform.

This research explores how moving between groups where individuals hold different status levels influences their subjective interpretation of their present status. We found evidence that individuals holding the same objective level of status experience it differently depending on whether they held higher or lower status in previous groups they belonged to. In particular, those who reached their current standing through status gain (coming from a group where they had lower status) experienced their current status as if it were subjectively higher compared to participants who reached the same objective status level through an equal-sized loss (coming from a group where they had higher status). Furthermore, we found that the spillover effect of individuals’ previous status depended on whether they experienced status gain or loss. Individuals who gained status revealed an overshooting effect, by which their self-perceived status overshot their current status level, leading them to overestimate how much status they actually held. Conversely, individuals who lost status exhibited an anchoring effect, by which they anchored their self-perception of their current status level on their previous higher standing, insufficiently adjusting their perception of their new status. We discuss the implications of this study for research on the dynamic nature of status.

Fernandes, Catarina R., and Jeffrey T. Polzer. "Status Spillover: How Status in One Group Influences the Perception of Status in Other Groups." Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA, August 2014. View Details

Bridgewater Associates was the world's largest hedge fund with approximately $120 billion in assets under management in mid-2012, and its leaders attribute its record-beating performance to the firm's culture of "radical transparency." The founder, Ray Dalio, was instrumental in developing this unique culture, but at the time of the case he was transitioning out of the firm's leadership and attempting to institutionalize the culture. For example, Dalio codified his personal and management principles in a 123-page document that was not only mandatory reading for all employees, but also formed the basis for nightly "homework" assignments that quizzed people on their understanding of the principles. The case offers the opportunity to explore the unusual practices that underpin Bridgewater's culture (e.g., videotaping meetings, publicizing every employee's performance review, interrupting investment meetings to provide personal feedback to individuals in front of dozens of colleagues). Class discussion prompts students to critically examine whether, how and to what extent the practices foster high performance and to debate their associated tradeoffs.